years and was seldom shared with
agency and component leadership.
With the endorsement of the director of National Intelligence (DNI),
we arranged individual, in-person
interviews with each organizational head to discuss diversity trends,
highlights and plans. In some
cases, it took months to arrange
the sessions—“palace guards” routinely resisted and tried their best
to refer us to other senior staff,
until they were told that this effort
was at the direction of the DNI and
that we would be persistent.

We noticed how variations in the
posture and behavior of the leaders
during these meetings related to
corresponding differences in organizational results. We also realized
a universal truth: Nearly all leaders
generally express their support for
EEO and diversity, but few actually
get results from their subordinates.
The “default setting” is usually a
rhetorical comment that they are
committed to EEO and diversity,
but those are not related to the “real
business” of the enterprise. As long
as expensive lawsuits or grossly
negative publicity are avoided, the
subordinates won’t be held personally responsible for achieving
significant results, changing trends
or holding their own direct reports
accountable for the same.

In our sessions with the directors, we pointed out that every
major corporation at the top of its
game for diversity has learned—
some very expensively—that without genuine and credible advocacy
for these concerns in an organization’s front office, nothing changes.
Our message to senior leaders: For
real and measurable improvements
in diversity, the individual commitment of the leader is absolutely
essential. Beyond a general endorsement, his or her expression must

be visible, specific,
personal, persistent
and intentional.

the individual
commitment
of the leader
is essential.

Visible: Othersmust see and hearthe commitment, andthe visibility must beevident even whenthe “usual suspects”(diversity professionals) are not inthe room.

Specific: The expression will be
most credible when it addresses
specific conditions of the work
force and challenges for that
organization. Where are the
gaps? What are the trends in EEO
complaints?

Personal: Those who are
responsible for delivering results
should know it and be reminded
and evaluated at intervals, using
performance measures. In addition, leaders’ messages will be most
effective when they share their
values, with references to their
own “personal diversity story”
(when diversity became meaningful for them).

Persistent: Most leaders give
a speech on special diversity
occasions (e.g., special emphasis programs, Martin Luther
King Day, memorials), but the
message should be more constant. “Persistent” means just
that—on a regular basis, as
routinely as budget reviews and
reports on other programs.

Intentional: Results do not come
through chance or providence. They
occur when the leader says, “This is
what I want to happen.”

While progress has been slow,
the direct engagement of senior

leadership has result-ed in some measur-able improvements inthe IC. Overall repre-sentation of peoplefrom traditionallyunderserved popula-tions has increasedevery year for thepast five years, andthere are improvements in promo-tions, awards, scholarship anddevelopment programs. About 75percent of students in our StokesFellowship program, which offerstuition assistance, internships andpermanent job opportunities, arefrom traditionally underservedpopulations. We have also seenincreases in the representation oftraditionally underserved popula-tions and women in higher paygrades, senior positions and coremission skills—analysis, collection,and science and technology.

There is still more to be done,
however. Areas for improvement
include our diversity compared to
external benchmarks, especially for
Latinos. At 21 percent people from
traditionally underrepresented
racial/ethnic groups, 39 percent
women and 4 percent people with
disabilities, the IC is substantially
lower than the representation in
the rest of the federal work force,
the civilian labor force and the U.S.
population. We are also concerned
about hiring and attrition for
employees with disabilities.

Although we are not where
we want to be, the good news is
that subordinates will “make it
happen” once they perceive that
the positive commitment from
the top is sincere, meaning it
meets the five criteria. That is what
is happening in the modern-day
IC. And for that, we can all feel a
lot safer.